A major Internet conference ended today in Paris with the publication of an official "Communiqué on Principles for Internet Policy-Making" (PDF). A key piece of these principles involves deputizing Internet providers to become Internet cops—cops that would act on the basis of "voluntary agreements" with content owners and other groups, not on national laws.

Hey, it's voluntary!

"Civilizing" the Internet has largely been a country-by-country affair to date, but 2011 looks to be the year in which Internet "rules of the road" truly go global.

...

That voluntary cooperation should take the form of "codes of conduct" hashed out in a "multi-stakeholder process." Those codes could cover "fraudulent, malicious, misleading, and unfair practices taking place over the Internet." In return for cracking down on material passing through their pipes, ISPs would be relieved of legal liability; indeed, the limitation on their liability is actually a carrot with which to force them into participating in these "voluntary" meetings. As the communiqué puts it, offering liability limits may provide "the incentives for cooperation between stakeholders." The implied threat for ISPs who don't go along is clear.

...

Unsurprisingly, such digital rights groups have reacted strongly to the OECD proposal. Here in the US, the Electronic Frontier Foundation said the document could "encourage states to use Internet intermediaries to police online content, undermining freedom of expression, privacy and innovation across the world." It refused to sign on.

Why should ISPs take on any responsibility? Should telephone companies take on responsibility for people selling drugs or doing other illegal things over the phone? Should paper companies be responsible for people using paper in illegal activities? Should Nike be responsible for thieves running away after robbing a convenience store?

It does. But this one is a battle they really can't win. I think it boils down to the fact the backbone the Internet runs on was built and paid for mostly by national governments. Its their bat and ball. And I think all the ISPs know if push comes to shove the government will have the final word. So rather than force the issue and bring an unwieldy set of laws and a meddling bureaucracy down on their heads, its easier to seek some token compromise or act of symbolic capitulation to satisfy those calling for regulation.

Which the government doesn't have a problem with since it makes web usage easier to control.

Old US government trick. Anytime you don't have the constitutional authority to regulate something you climb into bed with business interests that will price it up high enough that it accomplishes the same thing. (Look at gas prices.)

And as long as these businesses impose a modicum of control over the growth and development of their product or service, they'll be left alone by the government, free to abuse and exploit the public at will. Not to say there won't be some puppet theater (i.e. public hearings, speeches, token attempts to pass pre-doomed legislation, etc.) but that's primarily all any official protest will be.

It's not Internet access the government is afraid of. It's cheap, ubiquitous, unrestricted, unmonitored, and open access that scares them out of their minds. The government hates lack of regulation. And privacy for individuals. Probably because government itself knows what badness it invariably gets up to whenever it's not sufficiently regulated - or thinks nobody's looking.

Its a well known aspect of human psychology: Every cheater assumes everybody else cheats. Every thief believes everybody steals.

And no bastard I've ever met thinks he's the only bastard in the room.

And no bastard I've ever met thinks he's the only bastard in the room.

Just found this ... too little time <sigh /> . That one should go in the quotable quotes book, Website, whatever. A most cogent observation, and applicable to most every political type I've ever met . (Also to most business execs/supervisors, but I won't go there - that'd require reams if in print, and way too many pages as a forum comment .)

Tee-hee , Minds me of Jackie Gleason's evadince in Smokey and the Bandit (an old Burt Reynolds feel-good film, if you're not familiar with it), and would be equally as funny if it didn't hit so close to home .

Can't really see how this could work even if ISPs were prepared to take on the role.

Is every ISP going to have to vet every download file and scan every webpage and email for illegal content? What would the legal ramifications be if they took on the role but then missed a file - would the film lobby be able to sue the ISP for supplying illegal material?

If they were to take on this function their costs would rocket - so who would have to pay?

Otherwise simple coarse filtering will make the web unusable.

China have just discovered that even they can't control the internet following the recent train crash - what chance do private companies have.

It is also a golden opportunity for new ISPs to set up that don't conform to the voluntary agreement! They wouldn't have the costs so they would be the cheapest and most popular ISPs - back to square one.

Sorry I don't really see how it would be in the interests of ISPs to volutarily enter into this process - and most smaller ISPs would simply close shop.